Knowledge:Identifying reliable sources (medicine)

1767: 1131:) and are therefore unsuitable for use in generating encyclopedic, reliable biomedical content. Scientists at Bayer reported in 2011 that they were able to replicate results in only ~20 to 25% of prominent studies they examined; scientists from Amgen followed with a 2012 publication showing that they were only able to replicate 6 (11%) of 53 high-impact publications and called for higher standards in scientific publishing. Further, the fact that a claim is published in a refereed journal need not make it true. Even well-designed randomized experiments will occasionally produce spurious results. Experiments and studies can produce flawed results or even fall victim to deliberate fraud (e.g. 1923:

integrate a topic of research into an overall view. In medicine, primary sources include clinical trials, which test new treatments. In addition to experiments, primary sources normally contain introductory, background, or review sections that place their research in the context of previous work; these sections may be cited in Knowledge with care: they are often incomplete and typically less reliable than reviews or other sources, such as textbooks, which are intended to be reasonably comprehensive. If challenged, the primary source should be supplemented with, or replaced by, a more appropriate source.

2406:

new and experimental treatment as "the cure" for a disease or an every-day substance as "the cause" of a disease. Newspapers and magazines may also publish articles about scientific results before those results have been published in a peer-reviewed journal or reproduced by other experimenters. Such articles may be based uncritically on a press release, which themselves promote research with uncertain relevance to human health and do not acknowledge important limitations, even when issued by an academic medical center. For Knowledge's purposes, articles in the popular press are

1899:, it is wise to skim-read everything available, including abstracts of papers that are not freely readable, and use that to get a feel for what reliable sources are saying. However, when it comes to actually writing a Knowledge article, it is misleading to give a full citation for a source after reading only its abstract; the abstract necessarily presents a stripped-down version of the conclusions and omits the background that can be crucial for understanding exactly what the source says, and may not represent the article's actual conclusions. 1332: 1323: 2236:

important. Medical textbooks published by academic publishers are often excellent secondary sources. If a textbook is intended for students, it may not be as thorough as a monograph or chapter in a textbook intended for professionals or postgraduates. Ensure that the book is up to date, unless a historical perspective is required. Doody's maintains a list of core health sciences books, which is available only to subscribers. Major academic publishers (e.g.,

2354: 1058:. Controversies or uncertainties in medicine should be supported by reliable secondary sources describing the varying viewpoints. Primary sources should not be aggregated or presented without context in order to undermine proportionate representation of opinion in a field. If material can be supported by either primary or secondary sources – the secondary sources should be used. Primary sources may be presented together with secondary sources. 2523:

sources, they may have missed other sources that would have been more useful or they may generate pages and pages of less-than-useful material. A good strategy for avoiding sole reliance on search engines is to find a few recent high-quality sources and follow their citations to see what the search engine missed. It can also be helpful to perform a plain web search rather than one of scholarly articles only.

3546:, and search for the name of the journal. On the journal page, under the heading "Current Indexing Status", you can see whether or not the journal is currently indexed. Note that journals that have changed names or ceased publication will not be "currently" indexed on MEDLINE, but their indexing status, when they were being published, can be viewed under other headings on that same page. 2252:) publish specialized medical book series with good editorial oversight; volumes in these series summarize the latest research in narrow areas, usually in a more extensive format than journal reviews. Specialized biomedical encyclopedias published by these established publishers are often of good quality, but as a tertiary source, the information may be too terse for detailed articles. 61: 2462: 2569:(often not peer-reviewed). The classification scheme includes about 80 types of documents. For medical information, the most useful types of articles are typically labeled "Guideline", "Meta-analysis", "Practice guideline", or "Review". Even when an article is one of the most useful types and recently published, it can be helpful to check the journal on 1445:. Respect the levels of evidence: Do not reject a higher-level source (e.g., a meta-analysis) in favor of a lower one (e.g., any primary source) because of personal objections to the inclusion criteria, references, funding sources, or conclusions in the higher-level source. Editors should not perform detailed academic peer review. 119: 1686: 3557:

Mabizela, Mahlubi; Manca, Andrea; Milzow, Katrin; Mouton, Johann; Muchenje, Marvelous; Olijhoek, Tom; Ommaya, Alexander; Patwardhan, Bhushan; Poff, Deborah; Proulx, Laurie; Rodger, Marc; Severin, Anna; Strinzel, Michaela; Sylos-Labini, Mauro; Tamblyn, Robyn; van Niekerk, Marthie; Wicherts, Jelte M.; Lalu, Manoj M. (2019).

2333:. The reliability of these sources ranges from formal scientific reports, which can be the equal of the best reviews published in medical journals, to public guides and service announcements, which have the advantage of being freely readable but are generally less authoritative than the underlying medical literature. 2209:. A sponsored supplement need not necessarily have a COI with its medical content; for instance, public health agencies may also sponsor supplements. However, groups that do have a COI may hide behind layers of front organizations with innocuous names, so the ultimate funding sources should always be ascertained. 3648: 2522:

are commonly used to find biomedical sources. Each engine has quirks, advantages, and disadvantages, and may not return the results that the editor needs unless used carefully. It typically takes experience and practice to recognize when a search has not been effective; even if an editor finds useful

2405:

fail to discuss important issues such as evidence quality, costs, and risks versus benefits, and news articles too often convey wrong or misleading information about health care. Articles in newspapers and popular magazines tend to overemphasize the certainty of any result, for instance, presenting a

1632:

may be used to describe personal opinions, but extreme care should be taken when using such sources lest more controversial opinions be taken at face value or, worse, asserted as fact. If independent sources discussing a medical subject are of low quality, then it is likely that the subject itself is

1953:

or institutional position papers (ideal sources for clinical recommendations). It is normally best to use reviews and meta-analyses where possible. Reviews give a balanced and general perspective of a topic and are usually easier to understand. However, whereas a narrative review may give a panorama

1939:

use sophisticated methodology to address a particular clinical question in as balanced (unbiased) a way as possible. Some systematic reviews also include a statistical meta-analysis to combine the results of several clinical trials to provide stronger quantitative evidence about how well a treatment

1922:

Peer-reviewed medical journals are a natural choice as a source for up-to-date medical information in Knowledge articles. Journal articles come in many different types, and are a mixture of primary and secondary sources. Primary publications describe new research, while review articles summarize and

1542:

In many topics, a review that was conducted more than five or so years ago will have been superseded by more up-to-date ones, and editors should try to find those newer sources, to determine whether the expert opinion has changed since the older sources were written. The range of reviews you examine

837:

is one in which the authors directly participated in the research and documented their personal experiences. They examined the patients, injected the rats, ran the experiments, or supervised those who did. Many papers published in medical journals are primary sources for facts about the research and

1711:

Use your best judgement when writing about topics where you may have a conflict of interest: citing yourself on Knowledge is problematic. Citing your own organization, such as a governmental health agency or an NGO producing high-quality systematic reviews, is generally acceptable – if the conflict

2004:

provides a list of 114 selected "core clinical journals". Another useful grouping of core medical journals is the 2003 Brandon/Hill list, which includes 141 publications selected for a small medical library (although this list is no longer maintained, the listed journals are of high quality). Core

2372:

s are the gold standard when it comes to assessing evidence quality. They take into account various aspects such as effect, risks, economic costs, and ethical concerns of a treatment. They seldom make recommendations, but instead explain most effective treatments and potential hazards and discuss

1537:

Keeping an article up-to-date while maintaining the more-important goal of reliability is important. These instructions are appropriate for actively researched areas with many primary sources and several reviews, and may need to be relaxed in areas where little progress is being made or where few

3556:

Grudniewicz, Agnes; Moher, David; Cobey, Kelly D.; Bryson, Gregory L.; Cukier, Samantha; Allen, Kristiann; Ardern, Clare; Balcom, Lesley; Barros, Tiago; Berger, Monica; Ciro, Jairo Buitrago; Cugusi, Lucia; Donaldson, Michael R.; Egger, Matthias; Graham, Ian D.; Hodgkinson, Matt; Khan, Karim M.;

2473:

Conference abstracts present incomplete and unpublished data and undergo varying levels of review; they are often unreviewed and their initial conclusions may have changed dramatically if and when the data are finally ready for publication. Consequently, they are usually poor sources and should

1934:

provide a general summary of a topic based on a survey of the literature, which can be useful when outlining a topic. A general narrative review of a subject by an expert in the field can make a good secondary source covering various aspects of a subject within a Knowledge article. Such reviews

1557:

Prefer recent reviews to older primary sources on the same topic. If recent reviews do not mention an older primary source, the older source is dubious. Conversely, an older primary source that is seminal, replicated, and often-cited may be mentioned in the main text in a context established by

1433:

would not be appropriate in the 'Treatment' section of a disease article because future treatments have little bearing on current practice. The results might – in some cases – be appropriate for inclusion in an article specifically dedicated to the treatment in question or to the researchers or

2235:

High-quality textbooks can be a good source to start an article, and often include general overviews of a field or subject. However, books generally move slower than journal sources, and are often several years behind the current state of evidence. This makes using up-to-date books even more

2108:

journal). Determining the reliability of any individual journal article may also take into account whether the article has garnered significant positive citations in sources of undisputed reliability, suggesting wider acceptance in the medical literature despite any red flags suggested here.

1727:(COI) must be disclosed. Editing on topics where one is involved or closely related, especially when there is potential financial gain, is discouraged. Medicine is not an exception. One way to contribute with a COI is to post on talk-pages, suggesting edits. Another alternative is the 1623:

Many treatments or proposed treatments lack good research into their efficacy and safety. In such cases, reliable sources may be difficult to find, while unreliable sources are readily available. When writing about medical claims not supported by mainstream research, it is vital that

995:

sources should NOT normally be used as a basis for biomedical content. This is because primary biomedical literature is exploratory and often not reliable (any given primary source may be contradicted by another). Any text that relies on primary sources should usually have minimal

1647:

with no supervision of content by the parent journal. Such articles do not share the reliability of their parent journal. Indications that an article was published in a supplement may be fairly subtle; for instance, a letter "s" added to a page number, or "Suppl." in a reference.

1434:

businesses involved in it. Such information, particularly when citing secondary sources, may be appropriate in research sections of disease articles. To prevent misunderstanding, the text should clearly identify the level of research cited (e.g., "first-in-human safety testing").

1497:

and animal-model data are cited on Knowledge, it should be clear to the reader that the data are pre-clinical, and the article text should avoid stating or implying that reported findings hold true in humans. The level of support for a hypothesis should be evident to a reader.

1000:, only describe conclusions made by the source, and describe these findings so clearly that any editor can check the sourcing without the need for specialist knowledge. Primary sources should never be cited in support of a conclusion that is not clearly made by the authors ( 1081:"A large study published in 2010 found that selenium and Vitamin E supplements, separately as well as together, did not decrease the risk of getting prostate cancer and that vitamin E may increase the risk; they were previously thought to prevent prostate cancer." (citing 2564:

When looking at an individual abstract on the PubMed website, an editor can consult "Publication Types", "MeSH Terms", etc. at the bottom of the page to see how the document has been classified in PubMed. For example, a page that is tagged as "Comment" or "Letter" is a

2410:. A news article should therefore not be used as a sole source for a medical fact or figure. Editors are encouraged to seek out the scholarly research behind the news story. One possibility is to cite a higher-quality source along with a more-accessible popular source. 3611: 3313: 2426:

are not peer reviewed, but sometimes feature articles that explain medical subjects in plain English. As the quality of press coverage of medicine ranges from excellent to irresponsible, use common sense, and see how well the source fits the

2301:

Guidelines and position statements provided by major medical and scientific organizations are important on Knowledge because they present recommendations and opinions that many caregivers rely upon (or may even be legally obliged to follow).

1944:

methodology to select primary (or sometimes secondary) studies meeting explicit criteria to address a specific question. Such reviews should be more reliable and accurate and less prone to bias than a narrative review. Systematic reviews and

1712:

of interest is disclosed, it is done to improve coverage of a topic, and not with the sole purpose of driving traffic to your site. All edits should improve neutral encyclopedic coverage; anything else, such as promoting an organization, is

2469:

Press releases, newsletters, advocacy and self-help publications, blogs and other websites, and other sources contain a wide range of biomedical information ranging from factual to fraudulent, with a high percentage being of low quality.

2349:

by tying together separate statements with "however", "this is not supported by", etc. The image below attempts to clarify some internal ranking of statements from different organizations in the weight they are given on Knowledge.

1968:), publish third-party summaries of reviews and guidelines published elsewhere. If an editor has access to both the original source and the summary and finds both helpful, it is good practice to cite both sources together (see 2336:

Guidelines by major medical and scientific organizations sometimes clash with one another (for example, the World Health Organization and American Heart Association on salt intake), which should be resolved in accordance with

979:, the Knowledge community relies on guidance contained in expert scientific reviews and textbooks, and in official statements published by major medical and scientific bodies. Note that health-related content in the general 2150:

are often (but far from always) unacceptable sources. They are commonly sponsored by industry groups with a financial interest in the outcome of the research reported. They may lack independent editorial oversight and

3360:

Li G, Abbade LP, Nwosu I, Jin Y, Leenus A, Maaz M, Wang M, Bhatt M, Zielinski L, Sanger N, Bantoto B, Luo C, Shams I, Shahid H, Chang Y, Sun G, Mbuagbaw L, Samaan Z, Levine MA, Adachi JD, Thabane L (December 2017).

1061:

Findings are often touted in the popular press as soon as primary research is reported, before the scientific community has analyzed and commented on the results. Therefore, such sources should generally be omitted

2413:

Conversely, the high-quality popular press can be a good source for social, biographical, current-affairs, financial, and historical information in a medical article. For example, popular science magazines such as

3277:

Rochon PA, Gurwitz JH, Cheung CM, Hayes JA, Chalmers TC (July 1994). "Evaluating the quality of articles published in journal supplements compared with the quality of those published in the parent journal".

2545:. PubMed can be searched in a variety of ways. For example, clicking on the "Review" tab will help narrow the search to review articles. The "Filters" options can further narrow the search, for example, to 419: 2166:

Indications that an article was published in a supplement may be fairly subtle; for instance, a letter "S" added to a page number, or "Suppl." in a reference. However, note that merely being published in

2561:, provides free access to full texts. While it is often not the official published version, it is a peer-reviewed manuscript that is substantially the same but lacks minor copy-editing by the publisher. 2104:, or its content being outside the journal's normal scope (for instance, an article on the efficacy of a new cancer treatment in a psychiatric journal or the surgical techniques for hip replacement in a 1245:

Finally, make readers aware of controversies that are stated in reliable sources. A well-referenced article will point to specific journal articles or specific theories proposed by specific researchers.

3257: 2341:. Guidelines do not always correspond to best evidence, but instead of omitting them, reference the scientific literature and explain how it may differ from the guidelines. Remember to avoid 1092:

Given time a review will be published, and the primary sources should preferably be replaced with the review. Using secondary sources then allows facts to be stated with greater reliability:

983:

should not normally be used to source biomedical content in Knowledge articles. (News sources may be useful for non-biomedical content, such as information about "society and culture" – see

1437:

Several formal systems exist for assessing the quality of available evidence on medical subjects. Here, "assess evidence quality" essentially means editors should determine the appropriate

308: 2373:

gaps in knowledge. Their name is somewhat of a misnomer as they do not need to concern "technology" as perceived by the public – but rather any intervention intended to improve health.

1134: 4635: 84: 1238:. Although significant-minority views are welcome in Knowledge, such views must be presented in the context of their acceptance by experts in the field. Additionally, the views of 2530: 4715: 4663: 489: 233: 181: 4690: 3010: 208: 4680: 198: 41: 1543:

should be wide enough to catch at least one full review cycle, containing newer reviews written and published in the light of older ones and of more-recent primary studies.

3204: 2741: 1949:

of randomized controlled trials can provide strong evidence of the clinical efficacy of particular treatments in given scenarios, which may, in turn, be incorporated into

872:

summarizes a range of secondary sources. Undergraduate- or graduate-level textbooks, edited scientific books, lay scientific books, and encyclopedias are tertiary sources.

1586: 1310:

or position statements by internationally or nationally recognized expert bodies also often contain recommendations, along with assessments of underlying evidence (see

2760: 2711: 2088:" behavior, which includes questionable business practices and/or peer-review processes that raise concerns about the reliability of their journal articles. (See also 566: 466: 47: 2489:

are usually acceptable sources for uncontroversial information; however, as much as possible Knowledge articles should cite the more established literature directly.

1368:(RCTs). Systematic reviews of literature that include non-randomized studies are less reliable. Narrative reviews can help establish the context of evidence quality. 3673: 1073:

of studies requires reliable secondary sources (not press releases or newspaper articles based on such sources). If conclusions are worth mentioning (such as large

1041: 811: 3003:"Evidence-Based Decision Making: Introduction and Formulating Good Clinical Questions | Continuing Education Course | dentalcare.com Course Pages | DentalCare.com" 2680: 2465:

Reliable sources must be strong enough to support the claim. A lightweight source may be acceptable for a lightweight claim, but never for an extraordinary claim.

1935:

typically do not contain primary research but can make interpretations and draw conclusions from primary sources that no Knowledge editor would be allowed to do.

1914:

to either provide an electronic copy or read the source and summarize what it says; if none of this is possible, the editor may need to find a different source.

575: 2187: 1643:

are commonly sponsored by industry groups with a financial interest in the outcome of the research reported. They may lack independent editorial oversight and

3254: 2716: 2147: 1640: 1505:

of data. Studies cited or mentioned in Knowledge should be put in context by using high-quality secondary sources rather than by using the primary sources.

861:

found in medical journals, specialist academic or professional books, and medical guidelines or position statements published by major health organizations.

4608: 2019: 1845: 4705: 4685: 4653: 4628: 2706: 2696: 2326: 2193: 1866: 1680: 303: 223: 203: 171: 2557:

to get a correctly written citation. Although PubMed is a comprehensive database, many of its indexed journals restrict online access. Another website,

1489:

studies and animal models serve a central role in research, and are invaluable in determining mechanistic pathways and generating hypotheses. However,

4748: 2163:

as academic articles. Such supplements, and those that do not clearly declare their editorial policy and conflicts of interest, should not be cited.

4710: 2735: 2668: 1047: 691: 270: 228: 3410:

Robinson KA, Goodman SN (January 2011). "A systematic examination of the citation of prior research in reports of randomized, controlled trials".

849:

summarizes one or more primary or secondary sources to provide an overview of current understanding of the topic, to make recommendations, or to

777: 3474: 3002: 2656: 2255:

Additionally, popular science books are useful sources, but generally should not be referenced on Knowledge to support medical statements (see

769: 732: 547: 4738: 4621: 2608: 2305:

Statements and information from reputable major medical and scientific bodies may be valuable encyclopedic sources. These bodies include the

2205: 1861: 1215: 443: 371: 68: 3725:

Cooper BE, Lee WE, Goldacre BM, Sanders TA (August 2012). "The quality of the evidence for dietary advice given in UK national newspapers".

731:. Sourcing for all other types of content – including non-medical information in medicine-articles – is covered by the general guideline on 2044: 3507: 1286:

information. Even in reputable medical journals, different papers are not given equal weight. Studies can be categorized into levels in a

4700: 3032: 2878:

Prinz F, Schlange T, Asadullah K (August 2011). "Believe it or not: how much can we rely on published data on potential drug targets?".

773: 589: 512: 218: 4599: 4574: 4554: 4509: 4147: 3094: 3070: 2701: 2626: 2542: 1589:

are generally of high quality and are periodically re-examined even if their initial publication dates fall outside the 5-year window.

526: 3508:

Predatory open access journals in a performance-based funding model: Common journals in Beall's list and in version V of the VABB-SHW

4161: 2443: 1046:

Primary sources should not be cited with intent of "debunking", contradicting, or countering conclusions made by secondary sources.

480: 1114:

If no reviews on the subject are published in a reasonable amount of time, then the content and primary source should be removed.

4673: 2593: 2199: 1274: 918: 887: 882: 704: 536: 191: 51: 3161: 761:, as such sources often include unreliable or preliminary information; for example, early lab results that do not hold in later 2437: 2007: 1903: 1187: 531: 4695: 2641: 2267:

undergo no independent fact-checking or peer review and, consequently, are not reliable sources. However, books published by

1419:); and non-evidence-based expert opinion or clinical experience. Case reports and series are especially avoided, as they are 1211: 1191: 424: 353: 288: 213: 37: 3239: 4753: 2365: 2322: 1625: 712: 344: 247: 1175:. Be careful of material published in journals lacking peer review or that report material mainly in other fields. (See: 2538: 2314: 2310: 2272: 1976: 684: 641: 636: 627: 596: 471: 434: 414: 330: 298: 293: 256: 4255:"How to read a paper. Statistics for the non-statistician. I: Different types of data need different statistical tests" 1750:

who reads the talk-page will not always have the knowledge to assess the sources properly. Then it is better to follow

4519: 2578: 2342: 2029: 1779:

can be useful as sources for images in Knowledge articles. Because the above image was published under the terms of a

1365: 584: 320: 283: 2493:

is less preferred as it is not possible to reference specific versions of their articles, and archives do not exist.

2084:. A journal article is probably not reliable for biomedical claims if its publisher has a reputation for exhibiting " 2357:

Guidelines are important on Knowledge because they present recommended practices and positions of major authorities.

4743: 3760: 2449: 1792: 815: 556: 407: 390: 261: 76: 2843: 335: 3525: 2330: 1074: 521: 429: 402: 658: 1780: 1564: 1502: 1388: 750:, academic and professional books written by experts in the relevant fields and from respected publishers, and 499: 494: 385: 380: 17: 2401:

The popular press is generally not a reliable source for scientific and medical information in articles. Most

1429:

and early-stage research should not be cited to imply wide acceptance. For example, results of an early-stage

1096:"Neither vitamin E nor selenium decreases the risk of prostate cancer and vitamin E may increase it." (citing 890:

requires sourcing that complies with this guideline, whereas general information in the same article may not.

1849:, publish a few freely readable articles even though most are not free. A few high-quality journals, such as 2318: 2306: 1546:

Assessing reviews may be difficult. While the most-recent reviews include later research results, this does

1283: 720: 677: 33: 4593:

Evidence-Based Health Care and Public Health: How to Make Decisions About Health Services and Public Health

4296:"How to read a paper. Statistics for the non-statistician. II: "Significant" relations and their pitfalls" 3232:

Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals

3173: 2133:

Some baseline methods to identify questionable journals have reached consensus in the academic community.

1331: 456: 4668: 3924:"From conference abstract to full paper: differences between data presented in conferences and journals" 2774: 2722: 2407: 1400: 1287: 666: 561: 186: 3780:"How do US journalists cover treatments, tests, products, and procedures? An evaluation of 500 stories" 2919:

Begley CG, Ellis LM (March 2012). "Drug development: Raise standards for preclinical cancer research".

3481: 2435:. Sources for evaluating health-care media coverage include specialized academic journals such as the 3612:"Food company sponsorship of nutrition research and professional activities: a conflict of interest?" 3570: 3314:"Food company sponsorship of nutrition research and professional activities: a conflict of interest?" 3177: 2928: 2566: 2085: 1493:

and animal-model findings do not translate consistently into clinical effects in human beings. Where

1199: 905:

A biomedical claim! Strong MEDRS (MEDical Reliable Source) sourcing is definitely required here (see

728: 708: 601: 358: 325: 1171:

are the best place to find both primary and secondary sources. Every rigorous scientific journal is

662: 3363:"A scoping review of comparisons between abstracts and full reports in primary biomedical research" 2756: 2553:, and/or to freely readable sources. Once you have a PMID from Pubmed, you can plug that PMID into 2422: 2142: 2121: 2100:

not be reliable are its publication in a journal that is not indexed in the bibliographic database

1776: 1551: 1384: 1347: 1195: 1168: 1117:

A reason to avoid primary sources in the biomedical field – especially papers reporting results of

1065: 1003: 906: 606: 315: 772:

for questions about reliability of specific sources, and feel free to ask at WikiProjects such as

4089: 4072: 3952: 3905: 3749: 3641: 3593: 3434: 3343: 3197: 2951: 2902: 2751: 2550: 2502: 2402: 2384: 2284: 2218: 2160: 1986: 1911: 1878: 1805: 1694: 1657: 1606: 1514: 1460: 1420: 1392: 1303: 1255: 1151: 1128: 1016: 789: 618: 613: 93: 80: 4041: 3688:"Developing a virtual community for health sciences library book selection: Doody's Core Titles" 1965: 1954:

of current knowledge on a particular topic, a systematic review tends to have a narrower focus.

1784: 1689:

People most interested in improving only a single article may have a connection to its subject.

1322: 4596: 4571: 4551: 4506: 4488: 4447: 4406: 4365: 4324: 4283: 4242: 4201: 4144: 3999: 3945: 3898: 3860: 3810: 3742: 3708: 3634: 3586: 3427: 3393: 3336: 3295: 3190: 3143: 3091: 3067: 2985: 2944: 2895: 2825: 2475: 2260: 2056: 1970: 1962: 1950: 1840: 1834: 1788: 1713: 1426: 1307: 1291: 1207: 1104: 1097: 1082: 858: 854: 751: 743: 739: 461: 148: 136: 132: 4565: 3040: 4545: 4479: 4471: 4438: 4430: 4397: 4389: 4356: 4348: 4315: 4307: 4274: 4266: 4233: 4225: 4192: 4184: 4081: 3990: 3982: 3935: 3894: 3890: 3852: 3801: 3791: 3734: 3699: 3626: 3578: 3423: 3419: 3384: 3374: 3328: 3287: 3182: 3134: 3126: 2977: 2936: 2887: 2861: 2816: 2808: 2728: 2346: 2338: 2268: 2081: 2050: 1927: 1629: 1582: 1408: 1380: 1376: 1311: 1218:) and widely respected governmental and quasi-governmental health authorities (for example, 1138: 1070: 997: 984: 956: 844: 716: 660: 2353: 2120:; updates are added separately by an anonymous post-doctoral researcher. On Knowledge, the 1179:.) Be careful of material published in disreputable journals or disreputable fields. (See: 4609:

Vitamin D & cancer: How can two news releases about the same study be polar opposites?

4113: 3261: 2241: 1532: 1124: 867: 747: 144: 2185:

supplement. Many, if not most, supplements are perfectly legitimate sources, such as the

2096:

section below for examples of such publishers.) Other indications that a journal article

1077:

with surprising results), they should be described appropriately as from a single study:

4064: 3821: 3574: 2932: 2759:, a bot-compiled listing of potentially unreliable publications cited by Knowledge (see 1278:, assessing evidence quality helps distinguish between minor and major views, determine 4547:

Science and Technology Resources: A Guide for Information Professionals and Researchers

4483: 4459: 4442: 4418: 4401: 4377: 4360: 4336: 4319: 4295: 4278: 4254: 4237: 4213: 4196: 4172: 3994: 3970: 3805: 3779: 3703: 3687: 3388: 3362: 3138: 3114: 2820: 2796: 2770: 2558: 2245: 2127: 2062: 1766: 1739: 1430: 1203: 960: 948: 832: 807: 762: 756: 650: 2812: 2159:

articles do not share the reliability of their parent journal, being essentially paid

4732: 3596: 3558: 3437: 3291: 2866: 2797:"Irreproducible experimental results: causes, (mis)interpretations, and consequences" 2574: 2554: 2546: 2519: 2416: 2113: 1999: 1990:, publish speculative proposals that are not reliable sources for biomedical topics. 1902:

To access the full text of a book or journal article, the editor may need to use the

1856: 1851: 1771: 1728: 1720: 1412: 1361: 1279: 1055: 976: 850: 4092: 3955: 3908: 3752: 3644: 3346: 2905: 914:

The pills were invented by Dr Archibald Foster and released onto the market in 2015.

3840: 3200: 2954: 2432: 2264: 2089: 2075: 1941: 1907: 1416: 1396: 1180: 1051: 952: 922: 3543: 3796: 3230: 916: 904: 4419:"How to read a paper. Papers that tell you what things cost (economic analyses)" 2581:, but it is useful to compare the authors to others in the same field of study. 2428: 2175: 2152: 1644: 1634: 1628:, independent sources be used. Sources written and reviewed by the advocates of 1404: 1299: 1295: 1176: 1172: 4613: 4173:"How to read a paper. Getting your bearings (deciding what the paper is about)" 3922:

Rosmarakis ES, Soteriades ES, Vergidis PI, Kasiakou SK, Falagas ME (May 2005).

3878: 3582: 1734:

These methods are often best when writing about oneself, one's organization or

1344:, but they similarly put high-level reviews and practice guidelines at the top. 1210:

issued by major professional medical or scientific societies (for example, the

4065:"Open access and accuracy: author-archived manuscripts vs. published articles" 3379: 2013: 1830: 980: 128: 4475: 4434: 4393: 4352: 4311: 4270: 4229: 4188: 4085: 3986: 3738: 3526:"Potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers" 3130: 719:, and must accurately reflect current knowledge. This guideline supports the 2717:

Knowledge:Identifying and using style guides § Topical academic style guides

2486: 1747: 1743: 1235: 3948: 3901: 3863: 3813: 3745: 3711: 3637: 3589: 3430: 3396: 3339: 3193: 3186: 3115:"Papers that summarise other papers (systematic reviews and meta-analyses)" 2988: 2968:

Wright JG (May 2007). "A practical guide to assigning levels of evidence".

2947: 2898: 2828: 2461: 2130:

script can be leveraged to facilitate the detection of predatory journals.

1984:

sections, but is rarely useful for current medicine. Still others, such as

1107: 1100: 1085: 4491: 4450: 4409: 4368: 4327: 4286: 4245: 4204: 4002: 3940: 3923: 3298: 3146: 1637:

enough to have its own article or relevant for mention in other articles.

1501:

Using small-scale, single studies makes for weak evidence, and allows for

3856: 3475:"Brandon/Hill selected list of print books for the small medical library" 2981: 2490: 2237: 1738:– but may be less so when there is a potential conflict of interest in a 1559: 1485: 1119: 4016: 1685: 4536:

This is derived from a prepublication version of a series published in

4523: 4378:"How to read a paper. Papers that report diagnostic or screening tests" 3877:

Woloshin S, Schwartz LM, Casella SL, Kennedy AT, Larson RJ (May 2009).

3630: 3332: 2891: 2534: 2249: 2105: 2101: 2035: 1855:, publish only freely readable sources. Also, a few sources are in the 1735: 3529: 3451: 723:

with specific attention to what is appropriate for medical content in

2526: 1223: 754:

or position statements from national or international expert bodies.

151:

and position statements from national or international expert bodies.

2940: 1957:

Journals may specialize in particular article types. A few, such as

2702:

Knowledge:Reliable source examples § Physical sciences and medicine

2116:, an early list of potentially predatory journals, can be found at 2529:

is an excellent starting point for locating peer-reviewed medical

2482: 2460: 2352: 2156: 1765: 1684: 1906:, visit a medical library, pay to read it, or ask someone at the 3452:"Abridged Index Medicus (AIM or "Core Clinical") Journal Titles" 2570: 1379:). Roughly in descending order, these include: individual RCTs; 1227: 1219: 4617: 3841:"Communicating medical news—pitfalls of health care journalism" 2662:– maintenance tag for articles lacking reliable medical sources 1859:; these include many U.S. government publications, such as the 1360:

of treatments and other health interventions comes mainly from

664: 3879:"Press releases by academic medical centers: not so academic?" 3676:

of how to identify shill academic articles cited in Knowledge.

1839:

A Knowledge article should cite high-quality reliable sources

1550:

automatically give more weight to the most recent review (see

1231: 667: 113: 55: 3224: 3222: 2478:, and carefully identified in the text as preliminary work. 2155:, with no supervision of content by the parent journal. Such 2118:

Beall's List – of Potential Predatory Journals and Publishers

3166:

Nature Clinical Practice. Gastroenterology & Hepatology

1940:

works for a particular purpose. A systematic review uses a

147:), recognised standard textbooks by experts in a field, or 4214:"Assessing the methodological quality of published papers" 4141:

How to Read a Paper: The Basics of Evidence-based Medicine

1841:

regardless of whether they require a fee or a subscription

1795:

on Knowledge. Click on the above image to find its source.

1290:, and editors should rely on high-level evidence, such as 4160:

is taken from an earlier version of this book, which was

3066:(3rd ed.). Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone. pp. 102–05. 2275:

tend to be well-researched and useful for most purposes.

2117: 897:

could contain both biomedical and non-biomedical claims:

79:

may apply. Substantive edits to this page should reflect

4501:

Straus SE, Richardson WS, Glasziou P, Haynes RB (2005).

3086:

Straus SE, Richardson WS, Glasziou P, Haynes RB (2005).

3062:

Straus SE, Richardson WS, Glasziou P, Haynes RB (2005).

2537:

database of biomedical research articles offered by the

3108: 3106: 2577:

of authors if they make extraordinary claims. There is

2510: 2392: 2292: 2226: 1980:, publish historical material that can be valuable for 1886: 1820: 1813: 1702: 1665: 1614: 1522: 1475: 1468: 1371:

Lower levels of evidence in medical research come from

1263: 1159: 1135:

Retracted article on dopaminergic neurotoxicity of MDMA

1031: 1024: 797: 101: 4503:

Evidence-based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach EBM

4460:"Papers that go beyond numbers (qualitative research)" 3088:

Evidence-based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach EBM

3064:

Evidence-based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach EBM

3033:"The Journey of Research - Levels of Evidence | CAPhO" 2970:

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American Volume

1350:. Right: Canadian Association of Pharmacy in Oncology. 929:

They are purple and triangular, packaged one to a box,

4337:"How to read a paper. Papers that report drug trials" 3513:(Report). University of Antwerp, Gezaghebbende Panel. 2844:"Scientists' Elusive Goal: Reproducing Study Results" 2531:

literature reviews on humans from the last five years

3542:

To determine if a journal is MEDLINE indexed, go to

3090:(3rd ed.). Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone. p. 99. 2674:– a note for user talk pages with links to this page 2533:. It offers a free search engine for accessing the 1568:

as part of a discussion supported by recent reviews.

1449:

Avoid over-emphasizing single studies, particularly

1048:

Synthesis of published material advancing a position

2474:always be used with caution, never used to support 42:

Knowledge:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles

4522:. Centre for Health Evidence. 2001. Archived from 2777:which highlights potentially unreliable citations. 2048:. Core basic science and biology journals include 738:Ideal sources for biomedical information include: 2408:generally considered independent, primary sources 3506:Jakaria Rahman A, Engels TC (25 February 2015). 2712:Knowledge:Identifying reliable sources (science) 2082:a poor reputation for fact-checking and accuracy 759:should generally not be used for medical content 48:Knowledge:Identifying reliable sources (science) 3559:"Predatory journals: no definition, no defence" 3272: 3270: 2620:(same as above, except the text is highlighted) 1042:Knowledge:Identifying and using primary sources 932:as no-one ever manages to swallow a second one. 18:Knowledge:WikiProject Medicine/Reliable sources 3480:. Mt. Sinai School of Medicine. Archived from 2573:and other databases as well as the status and 2188:Astronomy & Astrophysics Supplement Series 1572:There are exceptions to these rules of thumb: 1202:, which can be found in recent, authoritative 4629: 4595:(3rd ed.). Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone. 4505:(3rd ed.). Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone. 4167:. Other parts of that serialization include: 2345:by only using the best possible sources, and 2148:Symposia and supplements to academic journals 1641:Symposia and supplements to academic journals 1094: 1079: 685: 8: 2126:compilation (updated twice monthly) and the 4567:Health Sciences Literature Review Made Easy 3971:"How to read a paper. The Medline database" 3761:"How far should we trust health reporting?" 2742:Dispatches: Sources in biology and medicine 2020:Journal of the American Medical Association 75:Editors should generally follow it, though 4636: 4622: 4614: 4520:"Users' Guides to Evidence-Based Practice" 3692:Journal of the Medical Library Association 2725:, an essay about why this guideline exists 2707:Knowledge:Conflicts of interest (medicine) 2697:Help:Knowledge editing for medical experts 2327:Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2194:Nuclear Physics B: Proceedings Supplements 1896: 1867:Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 1742:. For example, one may legitimately be an 1681:Knowledge:Conflicts of interest (medicine) 692: 678: 450: 277: 243: 4482: 4458:Greenhalgh T, Taylor R (September 1997). 4441: 4400: 4359: 4318: 4277: 4236: 4195: 4063:Goodman D, Dowson S, Yaremchuk J (2007). 3993: 3939: 3804: 3795: 3702: 3387: 3378: 3176: 3137: 2819: 1123:experiments – is that they are often not 959:, articles need to be based on reliable, 67:This page documents an English Knowledge 2867:Challenges in Reproducibility initiative 2731:, Frequently Asked Questions about MEDRS 1843:. Some high-prestige journals, such as 1592:A newer source that is of lower quality 808:Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources 3895:10.7326/0003-4819-150-9-200905050-00007 3424:10.7326/0003-4819-154-1-201101040-00007 3162:"How to critically appraise an article" 2787: 2736:Users' Guides to the Medical Literature 1754:, disclosing any COI and to be careful 649: 626: 574: 546: 511: 479: 442: 370: 343: 269: 246: 4544:Bobick JE, Berard GL (30 April 2011). 3686:Shedlock J, Walton LJ (January 2006). 3160:Young JM, Solomon MJ (February 2009). 2481:Medical information resources such as 1872: 727:Knowledge article, including those on 567:Deletion guidelines for administrators 3822:"Why reading should not be believing" 3654:from the original on 17 November 2018 3473:Hill DR, Stickell H, Crow SJ (2003). 2681:Reliable sources for medical articles 2206:The Times Higher Education Supplement 2005:general medical journals include the 1862:Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 1306:or conventional wisdom) are avoided. 1216:Infectious Disease Society of America 853:of several studies. Examples include 812:Identifying and using primary sources 143:secondary sources (such as reputable 7: 2279:Medical and scientific organizations 2128:Unreliable/Predatory Source Detector 2045:Canadian Medical Association Journal 1930:or systematic (and sometimes both). 1387:(non-experimental) studies, such as 4570:. Jones & Bartlett Publishers. 3845:The New England Journal of Medicine 2433:general reliable sources guidelines 1758:to overemphasize your own sources. 1558:reviews. For instance, the article 1054:, and Knowledge is not a venue for 2543:U.S. National Institutes of Health 2256: 2080:Avoid articles from journals with 1596:an older source of higher quality. 1194:demand that we present prevailing 902:Dr Foster's pills cure everything. 83:. When in doubt, discuss first on 25: 3245:from the original on 5 March 2014 2813:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.112.098244 2444:American Journal of Public Health 2441:. Reviews can also appear in the 2179:evidence of being published in a 1562:could mention Darwin's 1859 book 1340:There are different ways to rank 1242:minorities need not be reported. 1234:), in textbooks, or in scholarly 877:Biomedical v. general information 4749:Knowledge reliable source guides 3367:BMC Medical Research Methodology 3292:10.1001/jama.1994.03520020034009 3207:from the original on 14 May 2021 2200:Supplement to the London Gazette 1912:WikiProject Medicine's talk page 1897:searching for biomedical sources 1330: 1321: 1192:not publishing original research 921:, and it only requires ordinary 883:Knowledge:Biomedical information 141:reliable, third-party, published 117: 59: 52:Knowledge:Biomedical information 4417:Greenhalgh T (September 1997). 4156: 3727:Public Understanding of Science 3113:Greenhalgh T (September 1997). 2669:Reliable medical sources please 2438:Journal of Health Communication 2093: 2008:New England Journal of Medicine 1579:sections often cite older work. 154:Cite reviews, don't write them. 3820:Goldacre, Ben (20 June 2008). 3759:Goldacre, Ben (17 June 2011). 2880:Nature Reviews. Drug Discovery 2347:avoid weasel words and phrases 1974:for details). Others, such as 1721:conflict of interest guideline 1675:Personal conflicts of interest 1294:. Low-level evidence (such as 1212:European Society of Cardiology 1146:Summarize scientific consensus 947:Per the Knowledge policies of 895:Dr Foster's Magic Purple Pills 825:In the biomedical literature: 38:Knowledge:No original research 1: 4564:Garrard J (25 October 2010). 3255:Conflicts-of-interest section 2657:More medical citations needed 2366:Health technology assessments 2323:National Institutes of Health 1908:WikiProject Resource Exchange 1342:level of evidence in medicine 310:Don't disrupt to make a point 4739:Knowledge content guidelines 4644:Knowledge biomedical editing 4376:Greenhalgh T (August 1997). 4335:Greenhalgh T (August 1997). 4294:Greenhalgh T (August 1997). 4253:Greenhalgh T (August 1997). 4212:Greenhalgh T (August 1997). 3797:10.1371/journal.pmed.0050095 3524:Beall J (31 December 2016). 2609:Medical citation needed span 2539:National Library of Medicine 2315:National Academy of Sciences 2311:National Academy of Medicine 2273:National Academy of Sciences 2263:books or books published by 1977:Journal of Medical Biography 1873:Don't just cite the abstract 1417:retrospective cohort studies 1366:randomized controlled trials 770:reliable sources noticeboard 733:identifying reliable sources 490:Categories, lists, templates 165:Knowledge biomedical editing 4654:Editing for medical experts 4154:The Greenhalgh citation in 4114:"PubMed: Publication Types" 3883:Annals of Internal Medicine 3610:Nestle M (2 January 2007). 3412:Annals of Internal Medicine 2030:Annals of Internal Medicine 1302:) or non-evidence (such as 893:For example, an article on 331:Other behavioral guidelines 172:Editing for medical experts 4770: 4171:Greenhalgh T (July 1997). 4042:"PubMed tutorial: filters" 3969:Greenhalgh T (July 1997). 3839:Dentzer S (January 2009). 3583:10.1038/d41586-019-03759-y 2842:Naik G (2 December 2011). 2500: 2450:Columbia Journalism Review 2382: 2282: 2216: 2140: 2076:WP:RS § Predatory journals 2073: 2040:(British Medical Journal), 1876: 1828: 1803: 1692: 1678: 1655: 1604: 1530: 1512: 1458: 1389:prospective cohort studies 1253: 1186:Knowledge policies on the 1149: 1075:randomized clinical trials 1039: 1014: 919:not biomedical information 880: 805: 787: 91: 85:this guideline's talk page 45: 31: 4649: 3380:10.1186/s12874-017-0459-5 3312:Nestle M (October 2001). 2795:Loscalzo J (March 2012). 2627:Unreliable medical source 2331:World Health Organization 1752:ordinary editing protocol 1011:Respect secondary sources 746:) published in reputable 336:WMF friendly space policy 4476:10.1136/bmj.315.7110.740 4435:10.1136/bmj.315.7108.596 4394:10.1136/bmj.315.7107.540 4353:10.1136/bmj.315.7106.480 4312:10.1136/bmj.315.7105.422 4271:10.1136/bmj.315.7104.364 4230:10.1136/bmj.315.7103.305 4189:10.1136/bmj.315.7102.243 4086:10.1087/095315107X204012 3987:10.1136/bmj.315.7101.180 3778:Schwitzer G (May 2008). 3739:10.1177/0963662511401782 3131:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.672 2090:WP:RS#Predatory journals 1959:Evidence-based Dentistry 1781:Creative Commons license 1565:On the Origin of Species 1282:, and identify accepted 778:WikiProject Pharmacology 472:Other editing guidelines 435:Other content guidelines 304:Don't bite the newcomers 125:This page in a nutshell: 3619:Public Health Nutrition 3321:Public Health Nutrition 2594:Medical citation needed 2319:National Health Service 2307:U.S. National Academies 1746:on a certain topic – a 1601:Use independent sources 1538:reviews are published. 1509:Use up-to-date evidence 1401:cross-sectional studies 1272:When writing about any 1250:Assess evidence quality 721:general sourcing policy 34:Knowledge:Verifiability 4691:Plain and simple guide 4674:Biomedical information 4143:(3rd ed.). BMJ Books. 3187:10.1038/ncpgasthep1331 2746:The Knowledge Signpost 2466: 2375: 2001:Abridged Index Medicus 1971:Citing medical sources 1796: 1690: 1443:quality of publication 1383:studies; prospective 1356:The best evidence for 1112: 1090: 888:Biomedical information 705:Biomedical information 209:Plain and simple guide 192:Biomedical information 27:Wikimedia project page 4686:Conflicts of interest 4139:Greenhalgh T (2006). 3941:10.1096/fj.04-3140lfe 2642:Primary source inline 2497:Searching for sources 2464: 2403:medical news articles 2356: 2259:). In addition, most 2137:Sponsored supplements 2074:Further information: 1994:List of core journals 1769: 1729:articles for creation 1725:conflicts of interest 1688: 1679:Further information: 1427:Speculative proposals 1403:(surveys), and other 1288:hierarchy of evidence 1188:neutral point of view 1040:Further information: 949:neutral point of view 943:Avoid primary sources 881:Further information: 806:Further information: 420:Don't copy long texts 204:Conflicts of interest 32:Further information: 4754:WikiProject Medicine 4696:WikiProject Medicine 3857:10.1056/NEJMp0805753 2982:10.2106/JBJS.F.01380 2723:Knowledge:Why MEDRS? 2567:letter to the editor 2429:verifiability policy 2343:WP:original research 1777:open access journals 1415:analyses (including 1348:Procter & Gamble 1206:, in statements and 1200:scientific consensus 953:no original research 774:WikiProject Medicine 729:alternative medicine 354:Talk page guidelines 289:Conflict of interest 248:Knowledge guidelines 214:WikiProject Medicine 4017:"PubMed User Guide" 3575:2019Natur.576..210G 3532:on 11 January 2017. 3043:on 21 February 2016 2933:2012Natur.483..531B 2848:Wall Street Journal 2551:practice guidelines 2423:Scientific American 1918:Biomedical journals 1208:practice guidelines 1169:Scientific journals 425:Don't create hoaxes 4073:Learned Publishing 3631:10.1079/PHN2001253 3333:10.1079/PHN2001253 3260:2018-12-30 at the 3007:www.dentalcare.com 2892:10.1038/nrd3439-c1 2752:Replication crisis 2467: 2376: 2269:university presses 2173:supplement is not 2070:Predatory journals 1987:Medical Hypotheses 1951:medical guidelines 1937:Systematic reviews 1797: 1691: 1594:does not supersede 1409:ecological studies 1393:longitudinal study 1381:quasi-experimental 1308:Medical guidelines 1292:systematic reviews 1129:replication crisis 977:biomedical content 859:systematic reviews 855:literature reviews 760: 744:systematic reviews 726: 637:Naming conventions 415:Offensive material 299:Disruptive editing 294:Courtesy vanishing 149:medical guidelines 137:systematic reviews 133:literature reviews 127:Ideal sources for 4744:Knowledge sources 4726: 4725: 3569:(7786): 210–212. 2476:surprising claims 1932:Narrative reviews 1904:Knowledge Library 1789:Wikimedia Commons 1719:According to the 1453:or animal studies 1052:original research 838:discoveries made. 755: 724: 717:secondary sources 702: 701: 507: 506: 467:Understandability 366: 365: 321:Gaming the system 284:Assume good faith 160: 159: 131:material include 112: 111: 69:content guideline 16:(Redirected from 4761: 4659:Reliable sources 4638: 4631: 4624: 4615: 4605: 4587: 4585: 4583: 4560: 4535: 4533: 4531: 4515: 4495: 4486: 4454: 4445: 4413: 4404: 4372: 4363: 4331: 4322: 4290: 4281: 4249: 4240: 4208: 4199: 4153: 4126: 4125: 4123: 4121: 4110: 4104: 4103: 4101: 4099: 4069: 4060: 4054: 4053: 4051: 4049: 4038: 4032: 4031: 4029: 4027: 4013: 4007: 4006: 3997: 3966: 3960: 3959: 3943: 3919: 3913: 3912: 3874: 3868: 3867: 3836: 3830: 3829: 3817: 3808: 3799: 3775: 3769: 3768: 3756: 3722: 3716: 3715: 3706: 3683: 3677: 3670: 3664: 3663: 3661: 3659: 3653: 3625:(5): 1015–1022. 3616: 3607: 3601: 3600: 3553: 3547: 3540: 3534: 3533: 3528:. Archived from 3521: 3515: 3514: 3512: 3503: 3497: 3496: 3494: 3492: 3487:on 7 August 2011 3486: 3479: 3470: 3464: 3463: 3461: 3459: 3448: 3442: 3441: 3407: 3401: 3400: 3391: 3382: 3357: 3351: 3350: 3318: 3309: 3303: 3302: 3274: 3265: 3253: 3252: 3250: 3244: 3237: 3226: 3217: 3216: 3214: 3212: 3180: 3178:10.1.1.1041.1168 3157: 3151: 3150: 3141: 3110: 3101: 3100: 3083: 3077: 3076: 3059: 3053: 3052: 3050: 3048: 3039:. Archived from 3029: 3023: 3022: 3020: 3018: 3009:. Archived from 2999: 2993: 2992: 2965: 2959: 2958: 2916: 2910: 2909: 2875: 2869: 2858: 2852: 2851: 2839: 2833: 2832: 2823: 2792: 2729:Knowledge:MEDFAQ 2686:– for talk pages 2685: 2679: 2673: 2667: 2661: 2655: 2646: 2640: 2631: 2625: 2619: 2613: 2607: 2598: 2592: 2575:publishing track 2513: 2395: 2295: 2229: 1889: 1823: 1816: 1800:Non-free content 1762:Choosing sources 1705: 1668: 1617: 1583:Cochrane Library 1525: 1478: 1471: 1407:studies such as 1334: 1325: 1266: 1162: 1069:). Determining 1034: 1027: 925: 910: 845:secondary source 821:Types of sources 816:Party and person 800: 748:medical journals 694: 687: 680: 668: 557:Deletion process 451: 410: 409:Non-free content 391:Reliable sources 311: 278: 244: 177:Reliable sources 145:medical journals 121: 120: 114: 104: 63: 62: 56: 21: 4769: 4768: 4764: 4763: 4762: 4760: 4759: 4758: 4729: 4728: 4727: 4722: 4681:Manual of style 4645: 4642: 4602: 4591:Gray M (2009). 4590: 4581: 4579: 4577: 4563: 4557: 4543: 4529: 4527: 4526:on 19 July 2014 4518: 4512: 4500: 4470:(7110): 740–3. 4457: 4429:(7108): 596–9. 4416: 4388:(7107): 540–3. 4375: 4347:(7106): 480–3. 4334: 4306:(7105): 422–5. 4293: 4265:(7104): 364–6. 4252: 4224:(7103): 305–8. 4211: 4183:(7102): 243–6. 4170: 4150: 4138: 4135: 4133:Further reading 4130: 4129: 4119: 4117: 4112: 4111: 4107: 4097: 4095: 4067: 4062: 4061: 4057: 4047: 4045: 4040: 4039: 4035: 4025: 4023: 4015: 4014: 4010: 3981:(7101): 180–3. 3968: 3967: 3963: 3921: 3920: 3916: 3876: 3875: 3871: 3838: 3837: 3833: 3819: 3777: 3776: 3772: 3758: 3724: 3723: 3719: 3685: 3684: 3680: 3674:this discussion 3671: 3667: 3657: 3655: 3651: 3614: 3609: 3608: 3604: 3555: 3554: 3550: 3541: 3537: 3523: 3522: 3518: 3510: 3505: 3504: 3500: 3490: 3488: 3484: 3477: 3472: 3471: 3467: 3457: 3455: 3450: 3449: 3445: 3409: 3408: 3404: 3359: 3358: 3354: 3316: 3311: 3310: 3306: 3276: 3275: 3268: 3262:Wayback Machine 3248: 3246: 3242: 3235: 3229:Fees F (2016), 3228: 3227: 3220: 3210: 3208: 3159: 3158: 3154: 3125:(7109): 672–5. 3112: 3111: 3104: 3097: 3085: 3084: 3080: 3073: 3061: 3060: 3056: 3046: 3044: 3031: 3030: 3026: 3016: 3014: 3013:on 4 March 2016 3001: 3000: 2996: 2967: 2966: 2962: 2941:10.1038/483531a 2927:(7391): 531–3. 2918: 2917: 2913: 2877: 2876: 2872: 2859: 2855: 2841: 2840: 2836: 2794: 2793: 2789: 2784: 2693: 2683: 2677: 2671: 2665: 2659: 2653: 2644: 2638: 2629: 2623: 2615: 2611: 2605: 2596: 2590: 2587: 2579:no magic number 2517: 2516: 2509: 2505: 2499: 2459: 2399: 2398: 2391: 2387: 2381: 2374: 2363: 2317:), the British 2309:(including the 2299: 2298: 2291: 2287: 2281: 2242:Springer Verlag 2233: 2232: 2225: 2221: 2215: 2145: 2139: 2078: 2072: 1996: 1926:Reviews may be 1920: 1893: 1892: 1885: 1881: 1875: 1837: 1827: 1826: 1819: 1812: 1808: 1802: 1764: 1709: 1708: 1701: 1697: 1683: 1677: 1672: 1671: 1664: 1660: 1654: 1621: 1620: 1613: 1609: 1603: 1587:NICE guidelines 1535: 1533:Template:Update 1529: 1528: 1521: 1517: 1511: 1482: 1481: 1474: 1467: 1463: 1455: 1354: 1353: 1352: 1351: 1337: 1336: 1335: 1327: 1326: 1270: 1269: 1262: 1258: 1252: 1204:review articles 1166: 1165: 1158: 1154: 1148: 1044: 1038: 1037: 1030: 1023: 1019: 1013: 945: 940: 885: 879: 868:tertiary source 851:combine results 823: 818: 804: 803: 796: 792: 786: 763:clinical trials 757:Primary sources 740:review articles 698: 669: 661: 576:Project content 522:Manual of Style 430:Patent nonsense 408: 403:Fringe theories 309: 257:Guidelines list 242: 241: 199:Manual of style 167: 118: 108: 107: 100: 96: 88: 60: 54: 44: 28: 23: 22: 15: 12: 11: 5: 4767: 4765: 4757: 4756: 4751: 4746: 4741: 4731: 4730: 4724: 4723: 4721: 4720: 4719: 4718: 4713: 4708: 4703: 4693: 4688: 4683: 4678: 4677: 4676: 4671: 4666: 4656: 4650: 4647: 4646: 4643: 4641: 4640: 4633: 4626: 4618: 4612: 4611: 4606: 4601:978-0443101236 4600: 4588: 4576:978-1449618681 4575: 4561: 4556:978-1591587941 4555: 4541: 4516: 4511:978-0443074448 4510: 4498: 4497: 4496: 4455: 4414: 4373: 4332: 4291: 4250: 4209: 4162:serialized in 4149:978-1405139762 4148: 4134: 4131: 4128: 4127: 4105: 4055: 4033: 4008: 3961: 3914: 3869: 3831: 3818: 3770: 3757: 3717: 3678: 3665: 3602: 3548: 3535: 3516: 3498: 3465: 3443: 3402: 3352: 3327:(5): 1015–22. 3304: 3266: 3218: 3152: 3102: 3096:978-0443074448 3095: 3078: 3072:978-0443074448 3071: 3054: 3024: 2994: 2976:(5): 1128–30. 2960: 2911: 2870: 2853: 2834: 2807:(10): 1211–4. 2786: 2785: 2783: 2780: 2779: 2778: 2768: 2754: 2749: 2739: 2732: 2726: 2720: 2714: 2709: 2704: 2699: 2692: 2689: 2688: 2687: 2675: 2663: 2651: 2636: 2621: 2603: 2586: 2583: 2559:PubMed Central 2520:Search engines 2515: 2514: 2506: 2501: 2498: 2495: 2458: 2455: 2453:, and others. 2397: 2396: 2388: 2383: 2380: 2377: 2361: 2359: 2358: 2297: 2296: 2288: 2283: 2280: 2277: 2265:vanity presses 2261:self-published 2257:#Popular press 2246:Wolters Kluwer 2231: 2230: 2222: 2217: 2214: 2211: 2138: 2135: 2112:An archive of 2071: 2068: 1995: 1992: 1919: 1916: 1891: 1890: 1882: 1877: 1874: 1871: 1825: 1824: 1817: 1814:WP:NOTONLYFREE 1809: 1804: 1801: 1798: 1763: 1760: 1740:research field 1707: 1706: 1698: 1693: 1676: 1673: 1670: 1669: 1661: 1656: 1653: 1650: 1630:marginal ideas 1619: 1618: 1610: 1605: 1602: 1599: 1598: 1597: 1590: 1580: 1570: 1569: 1555: 1544: 1527: 1526: 1518: 1513: 1510: 1507: 1503:cherry picking 1480: 1479: 1472: 1464: 1459: 1454: 1447: 1439:type of source 1431:clinical trial 1345: 1339: 1338: 1329: 1328: 1320: 1319: 1318: 1317: 1316: 1284:evidence-based 1268: 1267: 1259: 1254: 1251: 1248: 1164: 1163: 1155: 1150: 1147: 1144: 1036: 1035: 1028: 1020: 1015: 1012: 1009: 944: 941: 939: 936: 935: 934: 926: 911: 878: 875: 874: 873: 862: 839: 833:primary source 822: 819: 802: 801: 793: 788: 785: 782: 700: 699: 697: 696: 689: 682: 674: 671: 670: 665: 663: 659: 657: 654: 653: 647: 646: 645: 644: 639: 631: 630: 624: 623: 622: 621: 616: 611: 610: 609: 599: 594: 593: 592: 579: 578: 572: 571: 570: 569: 564: 559: 551: 550: 544: 543: 542: 541: 540: 539: 534: 529: 516: 515: 509: 508: 505: 504: 503: 502: 500:Disambiguation 497: 495:Categorization 492: 484: 483: 481:Categorization 477: 476: 475: 474: 469: 464: 459: 447: 446: 440: 439: 438: 437: 432: 427: 422: 417: 412: 405: 400: 399: 398: 388: 386:External links 383: 381:Citing sources 375: 374: 368: 367: 364: 363: 362: 361: 356: 348: 347: 341: 340: 339: 338: 333: 328: 323: 318: 313: 306: 301: 296: 291: 286: 274: 273: 267: 266: 265: 264: 259: 251: 250: 240: 239: 238: 237: 236: 231: 226: 221: 211: 206: 201: 196: 195: 194: 189: 184: 174: 168: 163: 162: 161: 158: 157: 122: 110: 109: 106: 105: 97: 92: 89: 74: 73: 64: 26: 24: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4766: 4755: 4752: 4750: 4747: 4745: 4742: 4740: 4737: 4736: 4734: 4717: 4714: 4712: 4709: 4707: 4704: 4702: 4699: 4698: 4697: 4694: 4692: 4689: 4687: 4684: 4682: 4679: 4675: 4672: 4670: 4667: 4665: 4662: 4661: 4660: 4657: 4655: 4652: 4651: 4648: 4639: 4634: 4632: 4627: 4625: 4620: 4619: 4616: 4610: 4607: 4603: 4598: 4594: 4589: 4578: 4573: 4569: 4568: 4562: 4558: 4553: 4549: 4548: 4542: 4539: 4525: 4521: 4517: 4513: 4508: 4504: 4499: 4493: 4490: 4485: 4481: 4477: 4473: 4469: 4465: 4461: 4456: 4452: 4449: 4444: 4440: 4436: 4432: 4428: 4424: 4420: 4415: 4411: 4408: 4403: 4399: 4395: 4391: 4387: 4383: 4379: 4374: 4370: 4367: 4362: 4358: 4354: 4350: 4346: 4342: 4338: 4333: 4329: 4326: 4321: 4317: 4313: 4309: 4305: 4301: 4297: 4292: 4288: 4285: 4280: 4276: 4272: 4268: 4264: 4260: 4256: 4251: 4247: 4244: 4239: 4235: 4231: 4227: 4223: 4219: 4215: 4210: 4206: 4203: 4198: 4194: 4190: 4186: 4182: 4178: 4174: 4169: 4168: 4166: 4165: 4159: 4158: 4151: 4146: 4142: 4137: 4136: 4132: 4115: 4109: 4106: 4094: 4091: 4087: 4083: 4080:(3): 203–15. 4079: 4075: 4074: 4066: 4059: 4056: 4043: 4037: 4034: 4022: 4018: 4012: 4009: 4004: 4001: 3996: 3992: 3988: 3984: 3980: 3976: 3972: 3965: 3962: 3957: 3954: 3950: 3947: 3942: 3937: 3934:(7): 673–80. 3933: 3929: 3928:FASEB Journal 3925: 3918: 3915: 3910: 3907: 3903: 3900: 3896: 3892: 3888: 3884: 3880: 3873: 3870: 3865: 3862: 3858: 3854: 3850: 3846: 3842: 3835: 3832: 3827: 3823: 3815: 3812: 3807: 3803: 3798: 3793: 3789: 3785: 3784:PLOS Medicine 3781: 3774: 3771: 3766: 3762: 3754: 3751: 3747: 3744: 3740: 3736: 3733:(6): 664–73. 3732: 3728: 3721: 3718: 3713: 3710: 3705: 3701: 3697: 3693: 3689: 3682: 3679: 3675: 3669: 3666: 3650: 3646: 3643: 3639: 3636: 3632: 3628: 3624: 3620: 3613: 3606: 3603: 3598: 3595: 3591: 3588: 3584: 3580: 3576: 3572: 3568: 3564: 3560: 3552: 3549: 3545: 3539: 3536: 3531: 3527: 3520: 3517: 3509: 3502: 3499: 3483: 3476: 3469: 3466: 3453: 3447: 3444: 3439: 3436: 3432: 3429: 3425: 3421: 3417: 3413: 3406: 3403: 3398: 3395: 3390: 3386: 3381: 3376: 3372: 3368: 3364: 3356: 3353: 3348: 3345: 3341: 3338: 3334: 3330: 3326: 3322: 3315: 3308: 3305: 3300: 3297: 3293: 3289: 3286:(2): 108–13. 3285: 3281: 3273: 3271: 3267: 3263: 3259: 3256: 3241: 3234: 3233: 3225: 3223: 3219: 3206: 3202: 3199: 3195: 3192: 3188: 3184: 3179: 3175: 3171: 3167: 3163: 3156: 3153: 3148: 3145: 3140: 3136: 3132: 3128: 3124: 3120: 3116: 3109: 3107: 3103: 3098: 3093: 3089: 3082: 3079: 3074: 3069: 3065: 3058: 3055: 3042: 3038: 3037:www.capho.org 3034: 3028: 3025: 3012: 3008: 3004: 2998: 2995: 2990: 2987: 2983: 2979: 2975: 2971: 2964: 2961: 2956: 2953: 2949: 2946: 2942: 2938: 2934: 2930: 2926: 2922: 2915: 2912: 2907: 2904: 2900: 2897: 2893: 2889: 2885: 2881: 2874: 2871: 2868: 2865: 2863: 2857: 2854: 2849: 2845: 2838: 2835: 2830: 2827: 2822: 2818: 2814: 2810: 2806: 2802: 2798: 2791: 2788: 2781: 2776: 2772: 2769: 2766: 2764: 2758: 2755: 2753: 2750: 2747: 2743: 2740: 2738: 2737: 2733: 2730: 2727: 2724: 2721: 2718: 2715: 2713: 2710: 2708: 2705: 2703: 2700: 2698: 2695: 2694: 2690: 2682: 2676: 2670: 2664: 2658: 2652: 2650: 2643: 2637: 2635: 2628: 2622: 2618: 2610: 2604: 2602: 2595: 2589: 2588: 2584: 2582: 2580: 2576: 2572: 2568: 2562: 2560: 2556: 2552: 2548: 2547:meta-analyses 2544: 2540: 2536: 2532: 2528: 2524: 2521: 2512: 2508: 2507: 2504: 2496: 2494: 2492: 2488: 2484: 2479: 2477: 2471: 2463: 2457:Other sources 2456: 2454: 2452: 2451: 2446: 2445: 2440: 2439: 2434: 2430: 2425: 2424: 2419: 2418: 2417:New Scientist 2411: 2409: 2404: 2394: 2390: 2389: 2386: 2379:Popular press 2378: 2371: 2367: 2364: 2355: 2351: 2348: 2344: 2340: 2334: 2332: 2328: 2324: 2320: 2316: 2312: 2308: 2303: 2294: 2290: 2289: 2286: 2278: 2276: 2274: 2270: 2266: 2262: 2258: 2253: 2251: 2247: 2243: 2239: 2228: 2224: 2223: 2220: 2212: 2210: 2208: 2207: 2202: 2201: 2196: 2195: 2190: 2189: 2184: 2183: 2178: 2177: 2172: 2171: 2164: 2162: 2161:ads disguised 2158: 2154: 2149: 2144: 2136: 2134: 2131: 2129: 2125: 2124: 2119: 2115: 2110: 2107: 2103: 2099: 2095: 2091: 2087: 2083: 2077: 2069: 2067: 2065: 2064: 2059: 2058: 2053: 2052: 2047: 2046: 2041: 2038: 2037: 2032: 2031: 2026: 2022: 2021: 2016: 2015: 2010: 2009: 2003: 2002: 1993: 1991: 1989: 1988: 1983: 1979: 1978: 1973: 1972: 1967: 1964: 1960: 1955: 1952: 1948: 1947:meta-analyses 1943: 1938: 1933: 1929: 1924: 1917: 1915: 1913: 1909: 1905: 1900: 1898: 1888: 1887:WP:NOABSTRACT 1884: 1883: 1880: 1870: 1868: 1864: 1863: 1858: 1857:public domain 1854: 1853: 1852:PLoS Medicine 1848: 1847: 1842: 1836: 1832: 1822: 1818: 1815: 1811: 1810: 1807: 1799: 1794: 1790: 1786: 1782: 1778: 1774: 1773: 1772:PLoS Medicine 1768: 1761: 1759: 1757: 1753: 1749: 1745: 1741: 1737: 1732: 1730: 1726: 1722: 1717: 1715: 1704: 1700: 1699: 1696: 1687: 1682: 1674: 1667: 1663: 1662: 1659: 1651: 1649: 1646: 1642: 1638: 1636: 1631: 1627: 1616: 1612: 1611: 1608: 1600: 1595: 1591: 1588: 1584: 1581: 1578: 1575: 1574: 1573: 1567: 1566: 1561: 1556: 1553: 1549: 1545: 1541: 1540: 1539: 1534: 1524: 1520: 1519: 1516: 1508: 1506: 1504: 1499: 1496: 1492: 1488: 1487: 1477: 1476:WP:MEDINVITRO 1473: 1470: 1466: 1465: 1462: 1457: 1452: 1448: 1446: 1444: 1440: 1435: 1432: 1428: 1424: 1422: 1418: 1414: 1413:retrospective 1410: 1406: 1402: 1398: 1394: 1391:(one type of 1390: 1386: 1385:observational 1382: 1378: 1375:studies (see 1374: 1369: 1367: 1363: 1362:meta-analyses 1359: 1349: 1343: 1333: 1324: 1315: 1313: 1309: 1305: 1301: 1297: 1293: 1289: 1285: 1281: 1277: 1276: 1275:health effect 1265: 1261: 1260: 1257: 1249: 1247: 1243: 1241: 1237: 1233: 1229: 1225: 1221: 1217: 1213: 1209: 1205: 1201: 1197: 1193: 1189: 1184: 1182: 1178: 1174: 1173:peer reviewed 1170: 1161: 1157: 1156: 1153: 1145: 1143: 1141: 1140: 1139:Schön scandal 1136: 1130: 1126: 1122: 1121: 1115: 1111: 1109: 1106: 1102: 1099: 1093: 1089: 1087: 1084: 1078: 1076: 1072: 1068: 1067: 1059: 1057: 1056:open research 1053: 1049: 1043: 1033: 1029: 1026: 1022: 1021: 1018: 1010: 1008: 1006: 1005: 999: 994: 993: 988: 986: 982: 978: 975:sources. For 974: 973: 968: 967: 962: 958: 957:verifiability 954: 950: 942: 937: 933: 930: 927: 924: 920: 915: 912: 908: 903: 900: 899: 898: 896: 891: 889: 884: 876: 871: 870: 869: 863: 860: 856: 852: 848: 847: 846: 840: 836: 835: 834: 828: 827: 826: 820: 817: 813: 809: 799: 795: 794: 791: 783: 781: 779: 775: 771: 766: 764: 758: 753: 749: 745: 741: 736: 734: 730: 722: 718: 714: 710: 706: 695: 690: 688: 683: 681: 676: 675: 673: 672: 656: 655: 652: 648: 643: 640: 638: 635: 634: 633: 632: 629: 625: 620: 617: 615: 612: 608: 605: 604: 603: 600: 598: 595: 591: 588: 587: 586: 585:Project pages 583: 582: 581: 580: 577: 573: 568: 565: 563: 560: 558: 555: 554: 553: 552: 549: 545: 538: 535: 533: 530: 528: 525: 524: 523: 520: 519: 518: 517: 514: 510: 501: 498: 496: 493: 491: 488: 487: 486: 485: 482: 478: 473: 470: 468: 465: 463: 460: 458: 455: 454: 453: 452: 449: 448: 445: 441: 436: 433: 431: 428: 426: 423: 421: 418: 416: 413: 411: 406: 404: 401: 397: 394: 393: 392: 389: 387: 384: 382: 379: 378: 377: 376: 373: 369: 360: 357: 355: 352: 351: 350: 349: 346: 342: 337: 334: 332: 329: 327: 324: 322: 319: 317: 314: 312: 307: 305: 302: 300: 297: 295: 292: 290: 287: 285: 282: 281: 280: 279: 276: 275: 272: 268: 263: 262:Policies list 260: 258: 255: 254: 253: 252: 249: 245: 235: 232: 230: 227: 225: 222: 220: 217: 216: 215: 212: 210: 207: 205: 202: 200: 197: 193: 190: 188: 185: 183: 180: 179: 178: 175: 173: 170: 169: 166: 156: 155: 150: 146: 142: 138: 134: 130: 126: 123: 116: 115: 103: 99: 98: 95: 90: 86: 82: 78: 72: 70: 65: 58: 57: 53: 49: 43: 39: 35: 30: 19: 4658: 4592: 4582:16 September 4580:. Retrieved 4566: 4550:. ABC-CLIO. 4546: 4537: 4528:. Retrieved 4524:the original 4502: 4467: 4463: 4426: 4422: 4385: 4381: 4344: 4340: 4303: 4299: 4262: 4258: 4221: 4217: 4180: 4176: 4163: 4155: 4140: 4118:. Retrieved 4108: 4096:. Retrieved 4077: 4071: 4058: 4046:. Retrieved 4036: 4024:. Retrieved 4020: 4011: 3978: 3974: 3964: 3931: 3927: 3917: 3889:(9): 613–8. 3886: 3882: 3872: 3848: 3844: 3834: 3825: 3787: 3783: 3773: 3765:The Guardian 3764: 3730: 3726: 3720: 3695: 3691: 3681: 3668: 3656:. Retrieved 3622: 3618: 3605: 3566: 3562: 3551: 3544:this website 3538: 3530:the original 3519: 3501: 3491:16 September 3489:. Retrieved 3482:the original 3468: 3456:. Retrieved 3446: 3415: 3411: 3405: 3370: 3366: 3355: 3324: 3320: 3307: 3283: 3279: 3247:, retrieved 3231: 3209:. Retrieved 3172:(2): 82–91. 3169: 3165: 3155: 3122: 3118: 3087: 3081: 3063: 3057: 3045:. Retrieved 3041:the original 3036: 3027: 3015:. Retrieved 3011:the original 3006: 2997: 2973: 2969: 2963: 2924: 2920: 2914: 2883: 2879: 2873: 2860: 2856: 2847: 2837: 2804: 2800: 2790: 2767:for details) 2762: 2757:WP:CITEWATCH 2748:(2008-06-30) 2745: 2734: 2648: 2633: 2616: 2600: 2563: 2525: 2518: 2511:WP:MEDSEARCH 2480: 2472: 2468: 2448: 2442: 2436: 2421: 2415: 2412: 2400: 2369: 2360: 2335: 2304: 2300: 2254: 2234: 2204: 2198: 2192: 2186: 2181: 2180: 2174: 2169: 2168: 2165: 2146: 2143:WP:SPONSORED 2132: 2122: 2114:Beall's List 2111: 2097: 2079: 2061: 2055: 2049: 2043: 2039: 2034: 2028: 2024: 2018: 2012: 2006: 2000: 1997: 1985: 1981: 1975: 1969: 1958: 1956: 1946: 1942:reproducible 1936: 1931: 1925: 1921: 1901: 1894: 1860: 1850: 1844: 1838: 1821:WP:FUTONBIAS 1783:, it can be 1770: 1755: 1751: 1733: 1724: 1718: 1710: 1639: 1622: 1593: 1585:reviews and 1576: 1571: 1563: 1547: 1536: 1500: 1494: 1490: 1484: 1483: 1469:WP:MEDANIMAL 1456: 1450: 1442: 1438: 1436: 1425: 1421:uncontrolled 1397:case control 1372: 1370: 1357: 1355: 1341: 1296:case reports 1273: 1271: 1264:WP:MEDASSESS 1244: 1239: 1185: 1181:Sokal affair 1167: 1132: 1118: 1116: 1113: 1095: 1091: 1080: 1063: 1060: 1045: 1004:WP:Synthesis 1001: 991: 990: 989: 971: 970: 965: 964: 963:, published 946: 938:Basic advice 931: 928: 913: 907:WP:MEDASSESS 901: 894: 892: 886: 866: 865: 843: 842: 831: 830: 824: 767: 742:(especially 737: 703: 590:WikiProjects 457:Article size 395: 176: 164: 153: 152: 140: 124: 66: 29: 4706:How to edit 4048:17 November 3698:(1): 61–6. 3458:17 November 3418:(1): 50–5. 3047:3 September 3017:3 September 2801:Circulation 2775:user script 2321:, the U.S. 2176:prima facie 2153:peer review 2094:#References 1714:not allowed 1645:peer review 1626:third-party 1405:correlation 1177:Martin Rimm 961:independent 784:Definitions 713:third-party 562:Speedy keep 345:Discussions 224:How to edit 4733:Categories 4669:Why MEDRS? 4157:References 4098:24 October 3851:(1): 1–3. 3790:(5): e95. 3658:12 January 3373:(1): 181. 3249:12 January 2886:(9): 712. 2782:References 2649:some text. 2634:some text. 2617:some text. 2601:some text. 2329:, and the 2227:WP:MEDBOOK 2141:See also: 2014:The Lancet 1835:WP:MEDCOPY 1831:FUTON bias 1829:See also: 1775:and other 1731:pathway. 1666:WP:MEDBIAS 1615:WP:MEDINDY 1531:See also: 1523:WP:MEDDATE 1280:due weight 1236:monographs 1127:(see also 1125:replicable 981:news media 752:guidelines 715:published 711:reliable, 642:Notability 607:User boxes 602:User pages 359:Signatures 326:User pages 271:Behavioral 187:Why MEDRS? 129:biomedical 77:exceptions 46:See also: 4711:Resources 4701:Talk page 3597:209168864 3438:207536137 3174:CiteSeerX 2585:Templates 2555:this tool 2487:eMedicine 2393:WP:MEDPOP 2339:WP:WEIGHT 2293:WP:MEDORG 2182:sponsored 2123:CiteWatch 2086:predatory 1966:1462-0049 1928:narrative 1806:Shortcuts 1748:volunteer 1744:authority 1703:WP:MEDCOI 1552:recentism 1461:Shortcuts 1399:studies; 1377:WP:MEDDEF 1312:WP:MEDORG 1304:anecdotes 1160:WP:MEDSCI 1066:recentism 1032:WP:MEDREV 1025:WP:MEDPRI 1017:Shortcuts 985:WP:MEDPOP 966:secondary 798:WP:MEDDEF 614:Shortcuts 597:Templates 316:Etiquette 229:Resources 219:Talk page 81:consensus 4716:Outreach 4120:16 April 4093:44572906 3956:29281534 3949:15857882 3909:25254318 3902:19414840 3864:19118299 3826:Guardian 3814:18507496 3753:36916068 3746:23832153 3712:16404471 3649:Archived 3645:17781732 3638:11784415 3590:31827288 3431:21200038 3397:29287585 3347:17781732 3340:11784415 3258:Archived 3240:archived 3205:Archived 3194:19153565 2989:17473152 2948:22460880 2906:16180896 2899:21892149 2829:22412087 2763:Signpost 2691:See also 2647:– adds: 2632:– adds: 2614:– adds: 2599:– adds: 2503:Shortcut 2491:UpToDate 2385:Shortcut 2313:and the 2285:Shortcut 2238:Elsevier 2219:Shortcut 2092:and the 2042:and the 1879:Shortcut 1785:uploaded 1695:Shortcut 1658:Shortcut 1607:Shortcut 1560:Genetics 1515:Shortcut 1495:in vitro 1491:in vitro 1486:In vitro 1451:in vitro 1411:; other 1358:efficacy 1256:Shortcut 1152:Shortcut 1137:and the 1120:in vitro 1108:26957512 1101:29376219 1086:20924966 972:tertiary 917:This is 790:Shortcut 768:See the 709:based on 707:must be 619:Subpages 548:Deletion 527:contents 396:medicine 234:Outreach 102:WP:MEDRS 94:Shortcut 4492:9314762 4484:2127518 4451:9302961 4443:2127419 4410:9329312 4402:2127365 4369:9284672 4361:2127321 4328:9277611 4320:2127270 4287:9270463 4279:2127256 4246:9274555 4238:2127212 4205:9253275 4197:2127173 4003:9251552 3995:2127107 3806:2689661 3704:1324773 3571:Bibcode 3389:5747940 3299:8015117 3201:6532496 3147:9310574 3139:2127461 2955:4326966 2929:Bibcode 2821:3319669 2771:WP:UPSD 2765:article 2719:(essay) 2541:at the 2535:MEDLINE 2271:or the 2250:Informa 2106:urology 2102:MEDLINE 2057:Science 2036:The BMJ 2027:), the 1982:History 1865:of the 1736:company 1635:notable 1577:History 1373:primary 1214:or the 1196:medical 992:Primary 462:Be bold 444:Editing 372:Content 4530:9 July 4026:14 May 4021:PubMed 3563:Nature 3211:14 May 2921:Nature 2862:Nature 2527:PubMed 2447:, the 2248:, and 2051:Nature 2017:, the 1346:Left: 1300:series 1230:, and 1224:USPSTF 1071:weight 998:weight 955:, and 814:, and 651:Search 537:tables 40:, and 4116:. NLM 4090:S2CID 4068:(PDF) 4044:. NLM 3953:S2CID 3906:S2CID 3750:S2CID 3652:(PDF) 3642:S2CID 3615:(PDF) 3594:S2CID 3511:(PDF) 3485:(PDF) 3478:(PDF) 3454:. NLM 3435:S2CID 3344:S2CID 3317:(PDF) 3243:(PDF) 3236:(PDF) 3198:S2CID 2952:S2CID 2903:S2CID 2761:this 2549:, to 2483:WebMD 2213:Books 2203:, or 2157:shill 1895:When 628:Other 532:lists 513:Style 4597:ISBN 4584:2012 4572:ISBN 4552:ISBN 4538:JAMA 4532:2014 4507:ISBN 4489:PMID 4448:PMID 4407:PMID 4366:PMID 4325:PMID 4284:PMID 4243:PMID 4202:PMID 4145:ISBN 4122:2024 4100:2008 4050:2012 4028:2021 4000:PMID 3946:PMID 3899:PMID 3861:PMID 3811:PMID 3743:PMID 3709:PMID 3672:See 3660:2019 3635:PMID 3587:PMID 3493:2008 3460:2012 3428:PMID 3394:PMID 3337:PMID 3296:PMID 3280:JAMA 3251:2019 3213:2021 3191:PMID 3144:PMID 3092:ISBN 3068:ISBN 3049:2015 3019:2015 2986:PMID 2945:PMID 2896:PMID 2826:PMID 2773:, a 2571:DOAJ 2485:and 2431:and 2420:and 2325:and 2063:Cell 2060:and 2025:JAMA 1998:The 1963:ISSN 1846:JAMA 1833:and 1793:used 1791:and 1652:Bias 1633:not 1441:and 1240:tiny 1228:NICE 1220:AHRQ 1190:and 1133:the 1105:PMID 1098:PMID 1083:PMID 1064:see 1002:see 776:and 50:and 4664:FAQ 4480:PMC 4472:doi 4468:315 4464:BMJ 4439:PMC 4431:doi 4427:315 4423:BMJ 4398:PMC 4390:doi 4386:315 4382:BMJ 4357:PMC 4349:doi 4345:315 4341:BMJ 4316:PMC 4308:doi 4304:315 4300:BMJ 4275:PMC 4267:doi 4263:315 4259:BMJ 4234:PMC 4226:doi 4222:315 4218:BMJ 4193:PMC 4185:doi 4181:315 4177:BMJ 4164:BMJ 4082:doi 3991:PMC 3983:doi 3979:315 3975:BMJ 3936:doi 3891:doi 3887:150 3853:doi 3849:360 3802:PMC 3792:doi 3735:doi 3700:PMC 3627:doi 3579:doi 3567:576 3420:doi 3416:154 3385:PMC 3375:doi 3329:doi 3288:doi 3284:272 3264:, . 3183:doi 3135:PMC 3127:doi 3123:315 3119:BMJ 2978:doi 2937:doi 2925:483 2888:doi 2817:PMC 2809:doi 2805:125 2370:HTA 2368:or 2098:may 1910:or 1787:to 1756:not 1548:not 1395:); 1364:of 1314:). 1298:or 1232:WHO 1198:or 1183:.) 1142:.) 1050:is 1007:). 987:.) 969:or 857:or 725:any 182:FAQ 139:in 135:or 4735:: 4487:. 4478:. 4466:. 4462:. 4446:. 4437:. 4425:. 4421:. 4405:. 4396:. 4384:. 4380:. 4364:. 4355:. 4343:. 4339:. 4323:. 4314:. 4302:. 4298:. 4282:. 4273:. 4261:. 4257:. 4241:. 4232:. 4220:. 4216:. 4200:. 4191:. 4179:. 4175:. 4088:. 4078:20 4076:. 4070:. 4019:. 3998:. 3989:. 3977:. 3973:. 3951:. 3944:. 3932:19 3930:. 3926:. 3904:. 3897:. 3885:. 3881:. 3859:. 3847:. 3843:. 3824:. 3809:. 3800:. 3786:. 3782:. 3763:. 3748:. 3741:. 3731:21 3729:. 3707:. 3696:94 3694:. 3690:. 3647:. 3640:. 3633:. 3621:. 3617:. 3592:. 3585:. 3577:. 3565:. 3561:. 3433:. 3426:. 3414:. 3392:. 3383:. 3371:17 3369:. 3365:. 3342:. 3335:. 3323:. 3319:. 3294:. 3282:. 3269:^ 3238:, 3221:^ 3203:. 3196:. 3189:. 3181:. 3168:. 3164:. 3142:. 3133:. 3121:. 3117:. 3105:^ 3035:. 3005:. 2984:. 2974:89 2972:. 2950:. 2943:. 2935:. 2923:. 2901:. 2894:. 2884:10 2882:. 2864:'s 2846:. 2824:. 2815:. 2803:. 2799:. 2744:. 2684:}} 2678:{{ 2672:}} 2666:{{ 2660:}} 2654:{{ 2645:}} 2639:{{ 2630:}} 2624:{{ 2612:}} 2606:{{ 2597:}} 2591:{{ 2244:, 2240:, 2197:, 2191:, 2066:. 2054:, 2033:, 2011:, 1869:. 1723:– 1716:. 1554:). 1423:. 1226:, 1222:, 1103:, 951:, 923:RS 864:A 841:A 829:A 810:, 780:. 765:. 735:. 36:, 4637:e 4630:t 4623:v 4604:. 4586:. 4559:. 4540:. 4534:. 4514:. 4494:. 4474:: 4453:. 4433:: 4412:. 4392:: 4371:. 4351:: 4330:. 4310:: 4289:. 4269:: 4248:. 4228:: 4207:. 4187:: 4152:. 4124:. 4102:. 4084:: 4052:. 4030:. 4005:. 3985:: 3958:. 3938:: 3911:. 3893:: 3866:. 3855:: 3828:. 3816:. 3794:: 3788:5 3767:. 3755:. 3737:: 3714:. 3662:. 3629:: 3623:4 3599:. 3581:: 3573:: 3495:. 3462:. 3440:. 3422:: 3399:. 3377:: 3349:. 3331:: 3325:4 3301:. 3290:: 3215:. 3185:: 3170:6 3149:. 3129:: 3099:. 3075:. 3051:. 3021:. 2991:. 2980:: 2957:. 2939:: 2931:: 2908:. 2890:: 2850:. 2831:. 2811:: 2362:* 2170:a 2023:( 1961:( 1110:) 1088:) 1062:( 909:) 693:e 686:t 679:v 87:. 71:. 20:)

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.